Tweet
Originally posted by Taterhead
View Post
The Rules of Pacers Digest
Hello everyone,
Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.
A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.
Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.
Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.
Rule #1
Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:
"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"
"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"
"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"
"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"
"He/she is just delusional"
"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"
"I'm going to take a moment to point and
/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"
"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?"
In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.
We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.
Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.
That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.
A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.
There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.
Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.
In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.
Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.
If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!
All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.
Rule #2
If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.
The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.
The right places to do so are:
A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.
B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.
If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.
Rule #3
If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.
When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:
A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.
B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.
To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!
Rule #4
Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.
Rule #5
When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.
An example:
If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6
We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.
The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.
Rule #7
Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.
It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).
We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).
However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.
Rule #8
We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.
Rule #9
Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.
Rule #10
We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.
Rule #11
Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.
A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.
Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.
Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.
Rule #1
Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:
"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"
"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"
"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"
"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"
"He/she is just delusional"
"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"
"I'm going to take a moment to point and
/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*""Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?
"In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.
We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.
Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.
That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.
A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.
There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.
Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.
In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.
Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.
If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!
All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.
Rule #2
If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.
The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.
The right places to do so are:
A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.
B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.
If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.
Rule #3
If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.
When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:
A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.
B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.
To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!
Rule #4
Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.
Rule #5
When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.
An example:
If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6
We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.
The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.
Rule #7
Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.
It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).
We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).
However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.
Rule #8
We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.
Rule #9
Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.
Rule #10
We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.
Rule #11
Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less
-
Yep and that was another reason why I wasn’t rooting for this team this playoffs as every win was just going to give this greedy group more money on their bank accounts as that’s all they are looking for.
@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
-
I think you could argue that the team hasn't done a single for the future move in 8 years. Never traded for a draft pick, never traded away anybody that they thought had value unless they absolutely had to, and never played an inferior young player to develop them at the cost of even 1 regular season win.
Occasionally when a team is really going for it a team should avoid those types of things, but for the Pacers to do that for 8 straight years is crazy. It's hard to argue the Pacers over that timeframe are doing anything but moves that increase their floor and decrease their overall ceiling.Comment
-
Lucky for us we have a lot of cap space this summer and hopefully we use it wisely. I would love to see us picking up Smart or Rozier - both would be around the $12 million range. In addition, I hope we make a push for Kris Middleton.
Smart/Rozier
Oladipo
Middleton
Sabonis
Turner"So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.
Comment
-
From my perspective this is what I see Simon as caring about most in order:
1. Keeping Pacers in Indiana
2. Winning a Championship
3. Putting a competetive team in the floor
4. Being financially solventComment
-
I can get excited about Rozier . . . and then I watch him play in the playoffs.Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post"Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference
Comment
-
Originally posted by BillS View Post
Well I may have overstated my position but my statement is certainly closer to reality than your hyperbolic straw man.
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
This is all perfectly reasonable, if not a little over the top, but then I do have to ask. Why are there only two options you see? Why is my option of stepping back not an option? Stepping back is by no means tanking. I do not advocate tanking, I never would to the point that you are describing.Originally posted by BillS View Post
Why is that you might ask? Because I'm one of only a handful of people on here who have actually lived through tanking live and in person. I know what it's like to suck and then end up drafting Waymond Tisdale instead of Patrick Ewing. Or Steve Stepanovich instead of Ralph Sampson. Or Rik Smits instead of Danny Manning (to be fair neither of those two were top flight players). So yes I'm with you there, I've been there and done that and I know that here in Pacerland it has never worked and yes it took us over a decade to get out of that.
But I also know that constantly drafting in the late teens early 20's and continually signing mediocre free agents who are past their prime or in most cases never lived up to that people thought they could be. To surround a really good player and then a couple of above average players is also just a recipe for mediocrity and that is the cycle we are stuck in now and have been stuck in this since the collapse of the 2014 team. That is five years, half of a decade where we are good enough to make the playoffs but that is it.
Now look I get it, people can disagree over how good players are. As an example I think Oladipo is a really good player verging on maybe great. But to me he is not a transcendent that can take a group of average to above average players to another level. Could he be the best piece on a really good team? Yes, without a doubt. But to me we do not have a really good team around him nor do I see how this is going to happen.
What my plan calls for is to just not give Nate his security blankets, force him to actually develop the younger players and hopefully when Victor is fully ready either by the end of this year or most likely at the beginning of next year he has player around him who are equally athletic, quick, skilled offensively and can grow with him for the next two to three years after that. You stated in another thread how happy will Victor be if he doesn't have the team around him that he has now or in other words not necessarily a team that during the regular season outperforms it's expectations. I answer that he will be more happy IMO with knowing that the team is developing players around him so that he can actually advance in the playoffs and not just make it. I'm telling you I don't care how much he say's he loves it here in 3-5 years if we do nothing but flame out in the first round and other teams pass us by he will ask out and then we are going to say the same thing we said with Danny and to a certain extent with Paul. If only we had more talent around them.
In other words I'm trying to get more talent and not bottom out to do it.
But yes I will freely admit that the safe easy bet would be just to resign our front court and bring in a new version of Rodney Stucky/Monta Ellis/Tyreke Evans and we will make the playoffs again and yes a healthy healed Oladipo who hasn't lost anything due to his injury will make it a more competitive series but in the end the results will be the same.
Also I think I qualify as a person who is not out only for a title but would like to see one before I die. I understand there is a building process (yes I hate that word now because of Philly) so I am perfectly fine seeing a team build and on the rise. What I don't like is seeing a team that has plateaued and who is refusing to develop young assets all in the name of winning a few more regular season games. In other words would it really have mattered if we had lost to Philly or Toronto instead of Boston? BTW, before you say I know that is not Nate's job. I already admit that and don't blame him. This is on KP for not assuring Nate his job was secure or getting him better younger players to play if they don't feel the ones they have now are good enough.Last edited by Peck; 05-01-2019, 12:30 AM.
Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13Comment
-
Truth is we may never win a title. Seattle/OKC drafted future hall of famers in 3 straight drafts. Didn't win a title. It's not easy to win a title.
Remember how much fun that last game of the season was? I want the Pacers goal to be making the entire season be that much fun. Bogey's fun, the rest of our free agents aren't. Keep Bogey and let the rest walk. Then we need to add players with pizzazz. Players who make the offense click and bring out the best in their teammates. It starts with a crafty point guard. Find one.
Then tell Nate he has to run a more creative/uptempo offense. Tell him to use the bench to keep players fresh. Tell him that's his job.
I want to see our first round pick play, whoever he is. I want to see Holiday, Leaf and Sumner play. The front office needs to make sure that happens. Nate has a summer to figure out how.Comment
-
Originally posted by Peck View Post
Here is the key to this mess. What is he going to do? But above that is ownership. What is more important to them from year to year? After last years off season signings I was undeerwhelmed and
you were VERY disappointed. I thought maybe those decisions were because he had a grander plan for this offseason considering how many one year contracts he signed and I am hoping
KP has a grander vision than the last because if that kind of player is all I see signed this off season then I am going to be very negative and of the belief this is an ownership issue. If someone says that they tried getting a top tier free agent but no one wanted to come here then maybe it is time to re think your strategy and trade for high draft picks
and take a step back as you said for a year or two. All I know is that we have been on a hamster wheel going no where for 5 years as you pointed out.
Last edited by owl; 05-01-2019, 03:40 AM.{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
I also believe that the Simon's truly want to win a championship.Comment
-
Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
Definitely the team can't use the losing money excuse anymore. The TV revenue, the new social media ad revenue, the CIB payments to operate the building, and not to mention the Pacers get every bit of revenue from all the other concerts and events...not to mention the ABA TV contract has been bought out, so no more millions of dollars going to the ABA owners in perpetuity.
I remember the last major deal reached between Simon and the City which had included the renovations for the Video screen and LED ribbon display. There were articles stating the Pacers only recorded 1 or 2 profitable years at the field house, and the lost money all the other seasons. Nobody looked into those numbers with any detail, because I am pretty sure those figures were just for the team alone which had seen season ticket sales dip to around 5-6 thousand in that past decade due to the brawl and terrible teams, and the ABA TV contract. But you can't tell me all the extra revenue from the various concerts that Pacers Sports and Entertainment as a company wasn't raking in the profits here. Not to mention all those renovations happened just before the new TV revenue deal. And the team builds a new practice facility across the street. I mean that sounds like a team that is awash in cash right now.
So really no reason to hear things from the front office like "Well Mr. Simon gives us a number he is willing to spend every year..."Last edited by graphic-er; 05-01-2019, 10:47 AM.You can't get champagne from a garden hose.Comment
-
A couple of things to address here. You covered some - bringing it up doesn't mean I think you aren't saying it. I want to be complete so certain people might find it more difficult to take things out of context.Originally posted by Peck View Post
First, I think we agree that you can't both go after good players in trades and FA and also step back for a year. You are essentially trying to sell players on coming to your team to rest for a year or to stay with your team after you refused to use them so you could (quote/unquote) develop your other assets. It's hard enough to convince players to come here if they think we're trying to win something. Convincing them to come here to help us take a season off won't work. But not getting those FAs or keeping those traded players will be the fault of an incompetent front office.
"Stepping back" therefore has to assume you are at least standing pat and at most actively dumping veteran players to see if your rookie and second contract players work out. If they work out you are starting a rebuild all over again, which I suspect Dipo is not going to be completely on board with at this point. If he leaves because no one surrounded him with talent while he was rehabbing, well, there goes the incompetent FO letting our top player go again because they didn't give him options.
If in the previous paragraph developing your young guys doesn't work, congratulations - you've set yourself up to tank. Unless the team is just good enough to be playing for the 8th position in the playoffs in April, meaning that incompetent FO is trying to win meaningless games instead of going full bore for the lottery (tanking).
After that crappy year, what is next? Magically getting a couple of all-stars to show up? No, more likely another year or two of bad results (take your pick - late lottery, 8th seed, whatever you think is worse) unless you actively set yourself up to lose - tanking.
And then it becomes a cycle, unless one of those picks becomes good enough to start carrying you into the upper middle of the pack. You then have a choice to make - try developing a team around that player (who, since he plays for the Pacers, will "never be a guy you can win a championship with him as your best") OR run screaming from him and dump him at the first opportunity so you can continue trying to get better draft picks you can run screaming from if they aren't immediate franchise players.
I also see only doing the best you can and tanking as the binary options because swinging for the fences is often justified by saying that missing means you just go ahead and tank. Tie yourself to Conley's contract and Dipo (or Conley) gets injured? Just tank it out, man, it'll be great.
That's why I don't look at "stepping back" as something temporary or one-year-and-done.
Some individual items to address:
"Constantly drafting in the middle of the pack doesn't work" - neither does tanking unless you get the superstar #1 pick of the generation. Even considering that, only Cleveland (AFTER LeBron returned), Miami,and San Antonio have won with their own top 5 pick since the Golden Age of Jordan (you can mutter about Kobe, who should have gone higher but had refused to play for a small market team, but who knows where that would have gone). So fishing in the early lottery involves INCREDIBLE luck (that's why they call it a lottery).
The method that has absolutely been the most successful is to be able to get players who are proving themselves. If you get them in trades, someone has to give them up, and you need either draft picks that would be better than the players you're after (in which case why trade them?), aging stars (in which case they'd better have had a chance to shine in competition and not just be the best player on a bad team), or cap space to absorb bad contracts (which is another way of taking a risk). If you get them in FA, well, you have to have something to attract them, which unfortunately is either the bright lights of the city, the balmy climate during a part of the year you're seldom at home anyway, or an already present history of winning championships or at least being in the top 4 teams in the league.
And even THAT method doesn't always work - that's often been the method the Pacers have tried. I blame a lot of the failures to move forward in the Bird GM era to his singular obsession with the bargain basement guy who surely will work just as hard as HE did and become a star. I think calling KP a bust for missing on Evans in his second year of actually doing anything (again, a year that was supposed to be a placeholder for positioning a bad team to pick up the 2019 FA market) while failing to look at the long list of "this guy could be the best..." that Bird went after is unfair to KP (though I think the narrative is to blame it on Herb even though Larry seemed perfectly fine with having that no-strings "my way or I hit the pavement" contract that seemed to have that one pesky string he needed to be rid of. This is Bird - if he REALLY thought Herb was holding him back he'd have walked.)
But, for me, it all comes down to this. When I evaluate how I have enjoyed my time as a Pacer fan, it won't be about choosing to sit through hundreds of miserable games in the hope that before I die we'll have one time where we win the last game of the playoffs. I'm not excited to go to a game just because the other team has a superstar I can watch gleefully stomp the crap about the pitiful mes that represents my home. I don't want half-empty arenas even though it no longer necessarily means losing the team (in my lifetime, probably) because that's not fun. I want a community of fans of my team that revel in the game played by that team, not bonded by their shared desire to ridicule the product on the floor and dream of getting a magic championship.
We could very well end up bad in the fullness of time just because the cycle turns and players get hurt. Our luck means that Dipo could very well have seen his best games of his career already, and no one else right now is going to lead us any better from where we are right now. KP seems to be one of the best guys we've had in a long time at cap mananagement, which means when that happens we may not be bogged down with bad contracts like we were before (assuming some guys on the team don't get frustrated and start beating up fans or shooting up parking lots) and can take advantage. Who knows?
Does OKC ever win a championship? Maybe they would have if the Warriors hadn't changed the game, but who knows what the Pacers could have done if Cleveland hadn't been allowed to amass draft picks as a reward for letting LBJ go win his ring elsewhere. Does the Process work for Philly? I don't know, but that team became a laughing stock to its own dedicated fans for long enough that if it doesn't someone should be kicked into the next century.
Barring financial ruin, I'll be a seasons ticket holder until I die. I really don't want the majority of those years to be years where we lose on purpose to avoid the horror of not winning it all, while never ever actually being in a position to win it all anyway. The playing of the games is what I enjoy, not the machinations and player swapping and coaching changes and moving furniture around.Last edited by BillS; 05-01-2019, 10:55 AM.BillS
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...Comment
-
I do not believe that is the real question though. The question is what is he willing to do to win a championship? KP did some good this past offseason by not tying himself to any long term contracts.Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
Hopefully that means he thinks he has a shot at some talent to bring along side Victor. If none are signed we will not know what transpired but it will tell me at least that Pacers are going to have to be
very aggressive in trades to get a player or picks. Or do something BillS finds anathema. I will continue to watch if I see some hope in the player pipeline. Heck I have watched through all the years
and the team is tied to Indy for the next 25 years so threats of moving have little weight.{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
In the east you can play the young guys and still make playoffs if you have a good system and coach (see Orlando), this assumption that Pacers have to build a team of has beens or else is ridiculous.
I also don’t see the positive in getting swept by Boston or whoever, people act like getting swept by Boston is saving this franchise from moving or closing doors
Here is a thought, the billionaire is getting all he wants and more, why would he leave this gravy train? The answer is he won’t.@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!Comment
-
You know, for a team that hasn't done anything but sucked since the long-ago glory days of Sam Nassi (may his name be praised as a great owner) all so the current owner who bullies the city and the fans and clearly cares nothing for anyone but himself can laugh with evil glee as he feasts on the billions of dollar bills he swims in from bilking everyone in the state, you all spend an awful lot of time fretting over it. Seems to me you should cut your losses and just be Colts fans, since the Irsays don't take a dime from the city, always make the right moves, and provide so much to the community while being humble local businessmen.BillS
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...Comment
Comment